brotherdarkness wrote:Any problems using issue preclusion between criminal and civil cases. Example: State charges Dave with murder of Victoria. Dave is found guilty of murdering Victoria. Now Victoria's estate wants to bring a wrongful death action (or something) against Dave. Victoria's estate can use offensive collateral estoppel to conclusively establish that Dave did in fact kill Victoria?

Yep. Fine to use offensively as long as not unfair to the other side. Would be ok there.

Hm okay. I remember reading something about how this might be a problem because of different burdens of proof in various types of cases, but I don't remember the context (criminal/civil, or something totally different).

brotherdarkness wrote:Any problems using issue preclusion between criminal and civil cases. Example: State charges Dave with murder of Victoria. Dave is found guilty of murdering Victoria. Now Victoria's estate wants to bring a wrongful death action (or something) against Dave. Victoria's estate can use offensive collateral estoppel to conclusively establish that Dave did in fact kill Victoria?

Yep. Fine to use offensively as long as not unfair to the other side. Would be ok there.

Hm okay. I remember reading something about how this might be a problem because of different burdens of proof in various types of cases, but I don't remember the context (criminal/civil, or something totally different).

Yeah the state wouldn't be able to do it in its case against Dave because the standard of proof is higher, but issue preclusion in a wrongful death case after a murder conviction happens all the time.

brotherdarkness wrote:Any problems using issue preclusion between criminal and civil cases. Example: State charges Dave with murder of Victoria. Dave is found guilty of murdering Victoria. Now Victoria's estate wants to bring a wrongful death action (or something) against Dave. Victoria's estate can use offensive collateral estoppel to conclusively establish that Dave did in fact kill Victoria?

Yep. Fine to use offensively as long as not unfair to the other side. Would be ok there.

Hm okay. I remember reading something about how this might be a problem because of different burdens of proof in various types of cases, but I don't remember the context (criminal/civil, or something totally different).

Yeah the state wouldn't be able to do it in its case against Dave because the standard of proof is higher, but issue preclusion in a wrongful death case after a murder conviction happens all the time.

I think I'm a bit dense, so bear with me. If the civil case for wrongful death was before the criminal case, the state couldn't subsequently use issue preclusion in its criminal case?

brotherdarkness wrote:Any problems using issue preclusion between criminal and civil cases. Example: State charges Dave with murder of Victoria. Dave is found guilty of murdering Victoria. Now Victoria's estate wants to bring a wrongful death action (or something) against Dave. Victoria's estate can use offensive collateral estoppel to conclusively establish that Dave did in fact kill Victoria?

Yep. Fine to use offensively as long as not unfair to the other side. Would be ok there.

Hm okay. I remember reading something about how this might be a problem because of different burdens of proof in various types of cases, but I don't remember the context (criminal/civil, or something totally different).

Yeah the state wouldn't be able to do it in its case against Dave because the standard of proof is higher, but issue preclusion in a wrongful death case after a murder conviction happens all the time.

I think I'm a bit dense, so bear with me. If the civil case for wrongful death was before the criminal case, the state couldn't subsequently use issue preclusion in its criminal case?

Correct, because the burden of proof is higher in criminal cases. You could do it the other way around, though.

kykiske wrote:Random thought when jamming to Taylor Swift in the shower:

Let's say you score a 130/200 on Barbri's simulated MBE. And because of the "Barbri" effect, on exam day, you score a 140/200. Then, you get 15 points added to your scaled score. 155/200 scaled.

does everyone get the same amount added to their raw score? like does someone who scores 120 raw get 15 added to get to 135 scaled, and someone who gets a 135 raw also gets 15 added to get to 150 scaled? or is it like a % bump instead of a hard # bump?

Poopface wrote:does everyone get the same amount added to their raw score? like does someone who scores 120 raw get 15 added to get to 135 scaled, and someone who gets a 135 raw also gets 15 added to get to 150 scaled? or is it like a % bump instead of a hard # bump?

No, it is a scaled score, by some magical formula that NCBE applies. +15 is just a conventional wisdom

Poopface wrote:does everyone get the same amount added to their raw score? like does someone who scores 120 raw get 15 added to get to 135 scaled, and someone who gets a 135 raw also gets 15 added to get to 150 scaled? or is it like a % bump instead of a hard # bump?

No, it is a scaled score, by some magical formula that NCBE applies. +15 is just a conventional wisdom

Poopface wrote:does everyone get the same amount added to their raw score? like does someone who scores 120 raw get 15 added to get to 135 scaled, and someone who gets a 135 raw also gets 15 added to get to 150 scaled? or is it like a % bump instead of a hard # bump?

No, it is a scaled score, by some magical formula that NCBE applies. +15 is just a conventional wisdom

kykiske wrote:Random thought when jamming to Taylor Swift in the shower:

Let's say you score a 130/200 on Barbri's simulated MBE. And because of the "Barbri" effect, on exam day, you score a 140/200. Then, you get 15 points added to your scaled score. 155/200 scaled.

does everyone get the same amount added to their raw score? like does someone who scores 120 raw get 15 added to get to 135 scaled, and someone who gets a 135 raw also gets 15 added to get to 150 scaled? or is it like a % bump instead of a hard # bump?

I don't think anyone knows exactly how it's scaled. I know it varies test to test. But - hate to be a downer here - remember the raw is out of 190 on the real thing. 10 are experimental/ungraded.

Kage3212 wrote:Is anyone actually completing the "Review CMR Outline" assignments from the actual CMR? Or rather or you just using the time to go back over lecture notes?

I use the time to go over my outlines/lecture notes/whatever I'm using to review for that subject. But once I make that material I don't look at the CMR again unless it's to verify something I missed in an essay.

Just HOW different is Emmanuel questions compared to Barbri. I've done pretty much all the Barbri MBE practice questions possible, I've seen a lot of comments in this thread that they "feel different." Are the BARBRI questions that different than the real thing?

smokeylarue wrote:Just HOW different is Emmanuel questions compared to Barbri. I've done pretty much all the Barbri MBE practice questions possible, I've seen a lot of comments in this thread that they "feel different." Are the BARBRI questions that different than the real thing?

No clue about the "real thing" since none of us took it yet. Emanuel "feels" very different as in its questions make you feel uncomfortable. But usually ended up doing ok percentage wise.

smokeylarue wrote:Just HOW different is Emmanuel questions compared to Barbri. I've done pretty much all the Barbri MBE practice questions possible, I've seen a lot of comments in this thread that they "feel different." Are the BARBRI questions that different than the real thing?

They're pretty different but what you've learned in BarBri will still typically get you to the correct answer choice. I think most of us see improved scores with Emanual's (which are all actual questions [save for the civ pro] as far as I understand it) as compared to BarBri's.

Good Guy Gaud wrote:They're pretty different but what you've learned in BarBri will still typically get you to the correct answer choice. I think most of us see improved scores with Emanual's (which are all actual questions [save for the civ pro] as far as I understand it) as compared to BarBri's.

Emanuel S&T is a compilation of released questions, S&T2 are questions written by Emanuel himself (I think)?

On that note, did anyone read the subject notes on Emanuel (the few pages before question sets)? I dove right into questions so I skipped them. Are they worth reading?

Sorry to hear that. I lost my Dad to cancer during law school. My biggest regret is not spending more time with him. Instead, I was too focused on grades and studying instead of maximizing my time with my Dad. Don't make that mistake. There will always be another opportunity to take the bar exam. But you won't have another opportunity to spend this precious time with your father. Just one perspective from someone who, unfortunately, has been through what you're going through. PM me if you ever need to talk or vent.